Integrating costs into conservation planning across Africa.

Integrating costs into conservation planning across Africa. Much effort in systematic conservation planning has gone into devising measures and algorithms which are efficient at capturing the biological importance of different candidate areas. While cost is at the theoretical heart of complementarity based analyses, little empirical attention has been paid to explicitly incorporating cost into conservation planning. Here we begin to address this gap by utilising the first estimate of management costs for ecoregion conservation across the entire African continent to examine the consequences of incorporating estimates of management costs into conservation planning. We apply a recently developed equation linking empirical costs data to economic indicators and the size distribution of reserves to estimate the annual funding required to effectively manage reserve networks covering 10% of each of Africa's 118 ecoregions. Our estimates suggest that US$630 M/year (0.1% of African Gross National Income) would achieve this goal. However, within this the costs per ecoregion vary widely. Analysis of this variation in cost emphasises that high costs are likely to be correlated with high endemism or threat and that focussing exclusively on cheap areas is unlikely to achieve conservation goals. We also used the cost estimates to examine the potential for improving cost-effectiveness in conservation planning by comparing cumulative representation of vertebrate species and the associated management cost of reserves under different prioritisation schemes where cost was included or excluded. We found that factoring the cost of conservation management into the planning process results in a marked increase in the cost effectiveness of a given prioritisation scheme. This suggests that further improvements in systematic conservation planning are more likely to come more from measuring and integrating cost and other socio-economic considerations than from focusing exclusively on refinement of biological criteria. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Biological Conservation Elsevier

Integrating costs into conservation planning across Africa.

Loading next page...
 
/lp/elsevier/integrating-costs-into-conservation-planning-across-africa-pWXVIjImf4
Publisher
Elsevier
Copyright
Copyright © 2004 Elsevier Ltd
ISSN
0006-3207
D.O.I.
10.1016/j.biocon.2003.12.013
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Much effort in systematic conservation planning has gone into devising measures and algorithms which are efficient at capturing the biological importance of different candidate areas. While cost is at the theoretical heart of complementarity based analyses, little empirical attention has been paid to explicitly incorporating cost into conservation planning. Here we begin to address this gap by utilising the first estimate of management costs for ecoregion conservation across the entire African continent to examine the consequences of incorporating estimates of management costs into conservation planning. We apply a recently developed equation linking empirical costs data to economic indicators and the size distribution of reserves to estimate the annual funding required to effectively manage reserve networks covering 10% of each of Africa's 118 ecoregions. Our estimates suggest that US$630 M/year (0.1% of African Gross National Income) would achieve this goal. However, within this the costs per ecoregion vary widely. Analysis of this variation in cost emphasises that high costs are likely to be correlated with high endemism or threat and that focussing exclusively on cheap areas is unlikely to achieve conservation goals. We also used the cost estimates to examine the potential for improving cost-effectiveness in conservation planning by comparing cumulative representation of vertebrate species and the associated management cost of reserves under different prioritisation schemes where cost was included or excluded. We found that factoring the cost of conservation management into the planning process results in a marked increase in the cost effectiveness of a given prioritisation scheme. This suggests that further improvements in systematic conservation planning are more likely to come more from measuring and integrating cost and other socio-economic considerations than from focusing exclusively on refinement of biological criteria.

Journal

Biological ConservationElsevier

Published: May 1, 2004

References

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create folders to
organize your research

Export folders, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off